Whenever there’s an election, I’m reminded of how little some quarters of the church have learnt how detrimental it is to the Gospel when churches and church leaders make polarising political statements.

While I’m all for Christians engaging with politics, or standing for political office, the church as a whole MUST be above politics, non-partisan, and stick to its central message – the good news about God’s love and forgiveness through Jesus Christ.  Anything that clouds that message is an enemy of the Gospel.

Too Political

Several years ago, the Barna Foundation commissioned research amongst young adults (16-29) to find out why they didn’t engage, or ceased to be involved, with a church. One of the six reasons given was that the church was “too political”.[i]

So, I find it gobsmacking that some church leaders are still making politically divisive statements and actions even though the evidence is in that this harms the cause of Christ.

Christian Values?

Last week, I saw a post on a pastor’s Facebook page encouraging their followers/congregation to, “Let righteousness reign. Put Labor and the Greens last!”  I realise this reflects many conservative Christians’ views, but my question is, what message does this send to people in that church who may disagree? What about people who do vote Labor or Green and still love Jesus? What about people in the broader community who are considering Jesus and the Church but are then put off by this statement? Isn’t the Gospel inclusive or do you have to change how you vote when you become a Christian? Also, why is it “righteous” to vote for a conservative party?

This same leader posted the attached chart compiled by the Australian Christian Values Institute.

The Christian Values Checklist informs voters of what each political party stands for on various issues. The report concludes that, if you’re a real Christian, you’ll vote for Christian Democrats, DLP, or Rise Up Australia. If you can’t stomach any of these parties then Australian Conservatives, the Nationals or the Libs would be your choice. But whatever you do, “Let righteousness reign. Put Labor and the Greens last!”

Let’s examine those Christian values. Predictably they’re what you’d expect from conservative Christianity in Australia which has been highly influenced by American evangelicalism. In this tradition, the two main things Christians should focus on are anything to do with abortion or gay people (stop both as much as you can). While the chart helps you understand what various parties advocate on these issues, I can’t help notice the things that are missing. Are not refugees, the homeless, those living with a mental illness, and victims of domestic violence unworthy of the Christian vote? Why are Indigenous people and foreign aid absent? Didn’t Jesus say that the Gospel was good news for the poor? And which party/parties would have the best policies in place to help those on the margins of society? It also appears that poverty and the environment were added on as an afterthought! Maybe I’m wrong, but are they less important than opening parliament with Christian prayer for example?

And consider what’s been happening lately with Liberals in Victoria claiming “the party’s religious right is stacking branches with Mormons and Catholic groups in a drive to pre-select more conservative candidates [who] are often motivated by “single issues” like same-sex marriage or euthanasia. Members of conservative parties, including Family First and Australian Christians, have also been recruited,”[ii]as have people from Pentecostal Churches. Imagine the outcry if these same Christians found out that branches were being stacked by Muslims.

Last week, “the Liberal candidate for the inner-Melbourne seat of Wills … resigned over anti-gay comments … In comments on a conservative right-wing “Christian” blog post, Peter Killin said he would’ve voted against the preselection of Goldstein MP Tim Wilson because of his sexuality and described the homosexual lifestyle as ‘distressingly dangerous.’”[iii] I know Tim Wilson, and he’s a fine man with a passion for serving his local electorate. He responded very graciously by saying he would, “turn the other cheek and leave judgment to others.”

I realise that several candidates have been dropped from various political parties in the last few weeks, for all sorts of appalling behaviour, but when this conduct comes from Christians who want righteousness to reign, I feel compelled to speak out against such hypocrisy.

Stand for the Gospel

Let me repeat, I’m all for Christians engaging with politics, or standing for political office, but the church as a whole MUST be non-partisan. The Gospel is good news for ALL people (Luke 2:10). The church never does well when it’s in charge, it’s not meant to rule nations and manipulate political systems, it’s intended to proclaim a message of reconciliation with a God who loves people and a Saviour who died and rose again to bring forgiveness. I appeal to my fellow Christians and pastors to never lose this focus and to please stop muddying the waters.

 

[1] Kinnaman, David and Gabe Lyons, Unchristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity … and Why It Matters.

[ii] https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/victoria-liberals-religious-right-branch-stacking-fears/8667756?pfmredir=sm

[iii] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-01/federal-election-2019-liberal-candidate-advocates-against-gay-mp/11063002

 

It’s an awful thought that God would actually create some people for the very purpose of tormenting and torturing them for all eternity, but that’s what some Christians and churches believe, even today!

The belief that God predestines some people for hell comes from what I believe to be a misinterpretation of Romans chapter 9, which has been the subject of some controversy over the centuries. John Calvin and his followers used Romans 9 as proof of God’s predestining some people for heaven and some for hell (before they’re even born!).[i] This is not what Paul is teaching in the three illustrations he uses in this chapter:

  1. God loves Jacob and hates Esau
  2. The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart, and
  3. Clay in the Hands of God

(Please note, it would be helpful for you to read Romans 9 before reading the rest of this blog).

God Loves Jacob and Hates Esau

The word translated as “hate” can also mean, “to love less” or “put in second place”. “Love” infers a positive relationship whereas “hate,” indicates a lack of relationship. It’s important to note that God’s choice of Jacob had nothing to do with salvation, but rather with who would be the Father of the Nation of Israel. This honour first belonged to Esau, but he chose short-term satisfaction over long-term blessing. “Esau despised his birthright” (Genesis 25:29-34).

The author of Hebrews describes Esau as a godless person “who for a single meal sold his inheritance rights as the oldest son. Afterward, as you know, when he wanted to inherit this blessing, he was rejected. Even though he sought the blessing with tears, he could not change what he had done” (Hebrews 12:16-17).  

Romans 9 is not teaching about salvation but rather is speaking about the nations that resulted from Jacob and Esau. God has chosen people for greater or lesser degrees of service often based on their willingness, choices, and behaviour. Paul is addressing service rather than salvation.

The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart

The apostle’s second illustration is the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart. Hardening is a symbolic word which means “to twist” in the same way as you would ring out a dishcloth. When you ring out a cloth, you find out what’s in it. Through the ten plagues, God twisted Pharaoh’s heart to squeeze out what was inside, simply revealing what was already there!

Clay in the Hands of God

The final illustration is “Clay in the Hands of God” quoting from Isaiah chapters 29 and 45 as well as Jeremiah 18. “Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?”

Once again, the apostle is speaking about serving God rather than salvation. God does not create some people so that He can damn them to an eternal hell. If that were true, he’d be contradicting his nature as well as the entire intent of the Gospel that is very clearly for ALL people. Why would Jesus die for everyone if everyone could not access salvation?

The Apostle finishes this chapter by quoting from Isaiah 8:14 and 28:16, “As it is written: “See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.”

Zion was the hill in Jerusalem that lay opposite Mount Moriah on which the temple stood. On Zion was built the palace of David and the seat of justice. Sometimes Zion was applied to the whole city of Jerusalem as well as the Jewish people. Paul uses the symbolic language of a foundation stone that God would lay from and for the Jews.  A rock of salvation for all, but to many of the Jews, it became a stumbling block because they wanted to be right with God by obeying the Law rather than by trusting in Jesus as their Messiah.

Paul continues this same theme in chapter 10 of how Israel came to miss salvation while the Gentiles found it. The Jews are zealous for righteousness, but their zeal is misguided. They’re trying to be right with God by obeying the entire law, but that’s impossible. Paul says, “It’s not that hard” because “Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.”

Being right with God is not impossible like trying to get up to heaven to bring Jesus down or to bring Jesus back from the dead. God has already done this for us by his power. Salvation is simple, accessible and available just like the words you speak. Being right with God is achieved by declaring Jesus to be Lord – words that flow out of a heart that believes God has done the impossible by raising Jesus from the dead. Paul uses the word “everyone” twice in this chapter to declare that the gospel is not just limited to some people.

God doesn’t make some people be objects of wrath to be eternally tortured, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13). Now that’s Good News![ii]

 

[i] According to the Catholic Encyclopedia Calvin taught, “God for His own glorification, and without any regard to original sin, has created some as “vessels of mercy,” others as “vessels of wrath.” Those created for hell He has also predestined for sin, and whatever faith and righteousness they may exhibit are at most only apparent, since all graces and means of salvation are efficacious only in those predestined for heaven.” Others credit Augustine as the author of this heresy. In Christianity, the doctrine that God unilaterally predestines some persons to heaven and some to hell originated with Augustine during the Pelagian controversy in 412 CE.

[ii] Consider also 1 Timothy 2:3-4, “This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” And 2 Peter 3:9, “The Lord … is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.” That is the desire of God.

 

 

After converting from atheism to Christianity in my late teens and early 20s, I joined a small, Pentecostal church in Western Australia. About 20 to 30 people gathered each week. They were lovely people, and I made some good friends, but the pastor was an evangelist. One thing I’ve learned about evangelists is they make great evangelists but often lousy pastors.

The church was old-school Pentecostal, and the women wore hats and head coverings and long hair, whereas the men had short hair because that’s what the Bible clearly taught! And then, in 1979 in walks Rob Buckingham with his long blond hair, singlet and boardies, and the pastor didn’t know what to do with him! Over the next few weeks and months, the pressure was on to “cut your hair and buy a suit.” I eventually succumbed but not happily. I now realise that the pastor’s advice was based on an incorrect understanding of the Bible.

Does it really say that?

So, let’s take a look at what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 11:

“Every man who prays or prophesies with long hair dishonours his head. But every woman who prays or prophesies with no covering of hair dishonours her head—she is just like one of the “shorn women.” If a woman has no covering, let her be for now with short hair; but since it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair shorn or shaved, she should grow it again. A man ought not to have long hair.” [1]

In this chapter, Paul begins his instructions on orderly worship when the believers gather. [2] He starts by addressing head coverings and hair length, and it’s vital that we understand the cultural and historical background.

In the first century world, a woman’s hair was considered an object of lust, and so it was right for her to cover her head when in worship – this is still the case in some countries and cultures today but is not an issue in most western countries.

Paul’s support for women to wear head coverings was also a statement about economic equality. Wealthy women could afford elaborate hairstyles but the poorer women could not. To counter this disparity Paul suggests a custom of all women covering their heads so as not to cause the less fortunate members of the church to feel inferior – a proposal of revolutionary justice in the first-century world.

Along with head coverings, Paul also addresses hair length – long hair for women and short hair for men – just like my old church did in Western Australia. What our pastor didn’t realise, and thus didn’t teach, was that male prostitutes in Corinth identified themselves by wearing their hair long, and female prostitutes shaved their heads or had short hair. These were the so-called sacred prostitutes, employed by the Temple of Aphrodite in Corinth, who were often freed slaves that were dedicated to their gods for sacred sexual rites.

As we know from the “that is what some of you were” statement in 1 Corinthians 6, [3] there were former prostitutes in the Corinthian church. These men and women had become Christians and were thus no longer to identify with their previous immoral life. For this reason, the apostle encourages women to grow their hair long and for the men to wear their hair short. Such instructions do not apply in most situations today.

Notice also how Paul, in 1 Corinthians 11, teaches that women were encouraged to pray and prophesy in the Corinthian church, but in chapter 14 he writes, “Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.” How do we explain this apparent contradiction?

Always check the context

On closer inspection of the context and culture of these verses, it becomes evident what the Apostle Paul was addressing. The Corinthian church was out of control, gripped with carnality, lawsuits, immorality and false teaching. People were getting drunk during the Lord’s Supper, and their church meetings were in a mess with everyone competing for a chance to use the gifts of the Holy Spirit. It’s with this in mind that these verses in 1 Corinthians are to be understood: “If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home.” It seems that some women in the church were asking their husbands questions during the teaching of the Word and, this too, was disrupting the worship service.

The culture in which a church finds itself also has a significant bearing on the matter. Tony Campolo says, “If the existence of women preachers created a barrier to non-Christians coming into faith, then it was right for women to refrain from being preachers.  In today’s world… keeping women out of pulpits is having a negative effect upon the propagation of the gospel throughout the outside world, and therefore the policy on the matter which was in place in the past should be set aside.” [4]

If we were to take these verses literally we would disqualify all women from any vocal ministry in the church. That would include teaching children, youth leadership, speaking at women’s meetings, being missionaries, singing in the church, praying in prayer meetings and so on. So, women ARE allowed to speak in the church! The “church” being wherever believers gather. But, as per Paul’s final words in 1 Cor. 14, “Let all things be done decently and in order.”

 

[1] 1 Cor. 11:4-7

[2] 1 Corinthians chapters 11 to 14 inclusive

[3] 1 Cor. 6:9-11

[4] 20 Hot Potatoes Christians are afraid to touch, Tony Campolo, 1988 (Page 39)

Last Thursday I was tagged into a Facebook Post of Family Voice Australia[i], an organisation that promotes itself as “A Christian voice for family, faith & freedom.”

The post started with the words, “Dan Andrews’ Government is pushing to axe the Lord’s Prayer …”  I’d like to suggest that an organisation purporting to be “A Christian voice” should use that voice to speak with respect and truth, both of which were missing from the post and ensuing thread of comments.

Getting Facts Right

Premier Daniel Andrews is NOT pushing to axe the Lord’s Prayer.  This time the charge is being led by Crossbench Reason Party MP Fiona Patten.  Last Wednesday, the State Government referred to the Lord’s Prayer to the procedures committee for review.  Daniel Andrews is a Catholic and has said he was open to change.

The Lord’s Prayer is currently read in the Upper and Lower House in Federal Parliament and every state and territory parliament (except the ACT) at each opening sitting and has been since 1918.  In recent years an acknowledgement of traditional owners has also been included which two Liberal MPs have refused to stand for because they’re Christians.  Go figure!

When the tradition of reciting the Lord’s Prayer was started in 1918, over 90% of Australians identified as Christian.  At the last census, 52.1% of Australians acknowledged the Christian faith.  In Victoria, it’s slightly lower at 47.9%, and there’s an increasing number of Australians, 30% to be exact, who are reporting no religion. A third of these live in Victoria.

Unchristian Commentary

Please understand that I am not being critical of Family Voice Australia as a religious organisation, but I am concerned with some of the people and comments they attract.

The post about the Lord’s Prayer contained many inflammatory comments.  Some people suggested that Daniel Andrews is an evil person, a wingnut, who has sold his soul and is destined for hell, “he certainly won’t enjoy the second death!”

While there were some excellent comments and discussion on the thread, a lot of it spewed unkindness, judgmentalism, and hatred, all of which are unbecoming of people who profess the Christian faith.

I’m not sure if anyone else noticed the irony, but individuals who were advocating for the Lord’s Prayer seemed to contradict its central themes.  For example, “forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.”  There didn’t seem to be much forgiveness being exercised or deliverance from evil comments.

The Constitution

Another reader commented, “Our constitution isn’t multi faithed [sic.] It’s based on the Word of God only.”  Ummmm.  No, it isn’t.  Section 116 of the Australian Constitution includes the only comment about religion, “The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.” Section 116 does not apply to the states. Each state has its own constitution.

The Lord’s Prayer In Parliament?

So, what are my thoughts concerning the Lord’s prayer being read in Parliament?  I summarised them in a comment on Family Voice Australia’s post:

“While I would certainly like to see The Lord’s Prayer retained as part of the Parliamentary Standing Orders, I do think it’s important how Christians / churches respond to these kinds of things.  I’ve read some of the comments on this thread and, while some of them are measured, it appears to me that some reflect unkind and unchristian attitudes.  I don’t think this endears the church to the broader community. 

“It’s a tragedy that most people know the church’s position on ethical and moral issues, but they don’t understand the gospel because it’s been drowned out by all the other things they hear from us. This needs to change! People need to hear the gospel, the good news, about Jesus Christ. They need to know that “God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them” as the apostle, Paul wisely wrote. I’d also encourage you to read Jeremiah 29:4-14 which outlines God’s plan for his people living in godless Babylon (much more godless than Australia is today). Amongst his instructions God tells his people to, “seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.” Let’s unite in prayer for Australia, for Melbourne, for our politicians ~ even the ones you didn’t vote for and don’t like. And more than anything “Let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven” (Matthew 5:16).

Defend Faith Wisely

I believe we Christians need to choose our battles wisely; otherwise, we become viewed as a bunch of whiners who are defined by what they’re against.  I was talking to a State MP this morning, and he agreed.  While he likes the Lord’s Prayer being read and told me the vast majority of MPs are in the chamber at that time[ii], whether or not the prayer is read is NOT the burning issue of our time.

What to Advocate For

Frequently, Christians are viewed as protecting their own self-interests rather than looking out for the interests of others (Philippians 2:4).  If we’re going to lobby governments it should be on behalf of those who have no voice – the poor, marginalised and mentally ill, asylum seekers, victims of domestic or other types of abuse, widows and orphans, the homeless and trafficked, prisoners, people in hospital and nursing homes and those caught in a cycle of addiction.[iii]  That’s the gospel people need to hear and see.  Sadly, that’s not the message I got from the Family Voice Australia Facebook post last week.

Where to From Here?

I believe an excellent way forward is a statement to be read out that is based on the Golden Rule, rather than the Lord’s Prayer.[iv]  The Golden Rule is one of the oldest life truths known to the human race.[v] Jesus taught it, but it predates him by almost two thousand years and is found in all twelve traditional world religions, including Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Christianity.

It is first seen in ancient Egyptian history and has been quoted by some of the greatest philosophers including Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Seneca and Philo.  What has been known, taught and practised for thousands of years in various religions and philosophies has now also been embraced by modern social psychology.[vi]

The Golden Rule is the ultimate key to a fruitful and satisfying life – the principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated.  So why not write a statement that encapsulates that truth and reading that declaration in Parliament?  It would be a brilliant framework for all decisions our MPs need to make and, who knows, they may even start speaking to one another with a little more kindness!

 

[i] Formerly Festival of Light (Rev. Fred Nile)

[ii] The Greens wait outside the Chamber until the prayer is concluded

[iii] Luke 4:18-19; Matthew 25:34-40

[iv] Jesus put it like this, “In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets” (Matthew 7:12). In other words, living by this one rule of life is like living up to the entire Hebrew Scriptures (what Christians refer to as The Old Testament).

[v] https://baysidechurch.com.au/what-if-everyone-practised-the-golden-rule/

[vi] Modern social psychology refers to it as The Law of Reciprocity. When someone does something nice for you, you will have a deep-rooted psychological urge to do something nice in return. One psychology website asked the question: “Have you ever noticed that you feel compelled to do something for people who have helped you along the way – even if they haven’t asked you to? There’s something very powerful at play that causes this phenomenon.”

 

Bayside Church Logo

For all of my life as a Christian, I have hugely valued the prophetic gift as well as the prophecies that have been spoken into my life. I have been guided and strengthened by these words and regularly used them in spiritual warfare, just as the apostle encouraged his son in the faith, “Timothy, my son, I am giving you this command in keeping with the prophecies once made about you, so that by recalling them you may fight the battle well” (1 Timothy 1:8).  When the battle is raging, and discouragement tries to dampen my enthusiasm for the call of God on my life, I remind myself of the prophetic vision and “fight the battle well.”

It was through prophecy in 1984 that God led me to be a pastor and to train for that calling.[1]  It was through prophecy that I moved to Melbourne in 1988 – the same year the Holy Spirit spoke to me about pioneering a church in Cheltenham.  It was through five prophecies in 1991/92 that I knew it was the right time to pioneer Bayside Church, and insights from The Lord have kept us on track and on fire for the past 27 years of leading the church we started.

In the early weeks of this year (2019) the prophetic word once again started to burn within me as God showed me that the best days for Bayside were still ahead, that THE BEST WAS YET TO COME.  Last weekend I taught on one of the two verses of Scripture that have formed the basis of this prophecy – Haggai 2:9.  I encourage you to watch or listen to the podcast of this message. Over the coming weekend, I’ll be sharing on the other verse at all services at Bayside’s Frankston and Cheltenham Campuses.

I prophesy that:

  • God is bringing us into a new time of His Presence, that Bayside Church will be all the more magnificent & marvellous because of the presence of God filling and empowering all we do.
  • People who have been rejected, or exhausted, by other churches will find a home here.
  • New people will come and join us, and some of those who have moved on, for whatever reason, will realise that this is the house God has planted them in and they will return to continue the journey with us.

I predict that:

  • We will see many people choose to become followers of Jesus, to have their sins forgiven and their lives transformed by the Gospel. This transformation will inspire their family and friends who will also come and see what has caused such change. Some of them will also receive Jesus as their Saviour.
  • “Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever” (Daniel 12:3)

I declare that:

  • God is raising up new leaders, new connect groups, fires around the Bay where God’s people can enjoy genuine community, pray & care for one another, and reach out to their neighbours.
  • And I see an increase in boldness for God’s people. Not that we become brash and bombastic, but rather, out of humility and compassion towards the hurting we would offer to pray and genuinely care for the poor, the sick, the lonely, the imprisoned, and the marginalised. That God “will make your righteousness go forth as the light, and your justice as the noonday sun” (Ps 37:6), and “the glory of this present house will be greater than the glory of the former house,’ says the Lord Almighty. ‘And in this place, I will grant peace,’ declares the Lord Almighty” (Haggai 3:9).

And so, Bayside Church, may I inspire you to put into action the words of the apostle Paul, “But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus,” (Philippians 3:19) because …

THE BEST IS YET TO COME!

 

[1] For more on this, I encourage you to watch my testimony of conversion and calling ~  https://baysidechurch.com.au/church/senior-ministers/rob-buckingham/

 

 

There’s no doubt that there are some quite troubling sections in the Bible, especially in the Hebrew Scriptures. [i]We can either just skip “those” bits or we can dig a little deeper, research history and culture, and discover the truth.

One such problem is the warning that God punishes children for their parents’ sins, something that is repeated several times in the context of the Ten Commandments. [ii]

“The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation ” (Exodus 34:6-7 ).

Contradiction?

At first glance, these verses seem totally unfair and vindictive.  Why should innocent children be punished for the sins of their parents?  To interpret these verses in this way also contradicts other parts of the Bible. Consider Deuteronomy 24:16, “Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin.”

So, what are we to make of these words in Exodus 34? The Hebrew word translated, “punishes” is paqad (phonetically paw-kad), and has various meanings depending on context. [iv]  Until recently, most translations rendered this verse as, “visiting the iniquity of the fathers…” (not parents as in the modern translations). In the ancient world the father was the head of the household, the ruler or chief, and thus his character and behaviour, either good or bad, would have a significant impact on the rest of the family.

The verses in Exodus 34 focus on the iniquity (sin, perversity, moral evil and faults) of fathers, and the effect this behaviour had on their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. Families in the ancient east often included three or four generations living together under one roof. Thus, what the patriarch of the family did would literally affect “the children and their children … to the third and fourth generation.”

Bad Parenting?

Alan Nichols, a former Anglican Minister, wrote, “One of the worst features of the Yugoslavian civil war was the way grandfathers had taught their sons and grandsons how to continue to keep ethnic hatred between Serbs and Croats alive since the 1940s. I saw young soldiers say proudly, ‘My grandfather showed me why I should hate them.’” [v]

We still see the distress that bad parental behaviour has on children when they grow up to repeat their parents’ sins. The abused become the abuser, the child of an alcoholic parent sometimes grows up with a drinking problem and so on. On one of her programs many years ago, Oprah Winfrey interviewed a woman who traced child abuse back through five generations of her family. History kept repeating itself until someone made the decision that harmful behaviour would stop with them.

Sin Affects

And so, when Scripture states that God “[visits] the iniquity of the fathers on the children and their children … to the third and fourth generation,” it is not making a vindictive, unjust threat, but is rather stating the reality that no parent can sin without their children, and others in the household, being affected. “Parenthood brings with it a solemn responsibility to live in such a way that our children benefit, not suffer. Our behaviour should bless them not curse them.” [vi]

Sadly, the people in Bible days often believed that God literally visited judgement on subsequent generations for the sins of their forbears. The people of Israel even developed a proverb about this, “The parents eat sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge” (Ezekiel 18:2).

Hundreds of years later, the prophet Ezekiel questioned why this proverb was still being used considering that it was not true. He followed the question with a statement attributed to God, “As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel. For everyone belongs to me, the parent, as well as the child—both alike, belong to me. The one who sins is the one who will die” (Ezekiel 18:2).

Pointing Fingers

But old habits (and false doctrines) die hard. One day Jesus’ followers saw a blind man and asked, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” (John 9:2).  Jesus responded that sin was not the cause of his blindness, once again correcting the same age-old error. I still hear Christian people bring condemnation on others by suggesting their suffering is a result of sin. Maybe it is (although it usually isn’t), but we should be careful not to be like Job’s miserable comforters who heaped more sorrow on an already distressed person.

Changing the Course

Finally, it’s worth noting the emphasis on the goodness of God in these Bible verses: “the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin.” “I, the Lord your God … showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments” (Exodus 20:6).

Parents have an enormous responsibility to maintain and model their faith in God before their children and to live authentic lives that reflect compassion, justice, love, and grace to others. But, if this has not been your experience with your parent(s) or family, be encouraged that old patterns of behaviour can be broken. There is no reason for you to be limited by the trauma and troubles of the past. Seek help and accountability, “confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed” (James 5:16), book in with a qualified counsellor or psychologist to help you relearn healthy habits and, most importantly, rely on the grace and power of God to redeem your past and give you hope and a future (Jeremiah 29:11).

 

[i] Old Testament

[ii] Deuteronomy 5:8-10; 7:9-11; Exodus 34:6-7

[iii] Exodus 34:6-7

[iv] https://biblehub.com/hebrew/6485.htm

[v] Barry Chant, Breaking the power of the past. New Day Magazine, March 1992

[vi] Ibid

[viii] Ezekiel 18:3. I encourage you to read the rest of the chapter as all of Ezekiel 18 deals with this topic. It finishes with, “I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent! Turn away from all your offences; then sin will not be your downfall. Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit.”

 

Despite the media suppression order, many of us were well aware that George Pell was found guilty on December 11th last year in a unanimous Jury decision. Pell was found guilty on five charges – one charge of sexual penetration of a child under 16 and four of indecent acts with a child. The abuse happened in the 1990s at St. Patrick’s Cathedral while Pell was Archbishop of Melbourne.

There are others who have come forward to accuse George Pell of abusing them, about whom the general public will never hear. Some victims don’t want to go public for all kinds of reasons. [1] What we know from other cases is that those who do come forward are usually just the tip of the iceberg.

George Pell is due to be sentenced on March 13th, but was taken into custody yesterday (February 27th). The offenses carry a maximum jail term of ten years. George Pell maintains his innocence and his legal team has indicated that he will appeal the conviction.

One of the boys Pell abused was just 13 at the time. The following year he turned to drug use and was diagnosed with PTSD and depression. Sadly, this young man died from a heroin overdose when he was 30. There are tens of thousands of stories like this from children and adults who have been abused by priests, ministers, teachers, and others in positions of authority for decades in many nations.

Response to Andrew Bolt

Journalist Andrew Bolt has spoken out against Pell’s conviction stating that one of Pell’s abuse victims, now dead after a heroin overdose, denied being abused by a priest when asked by his mother. Bolt also said the other victim who gave evidence in court did not speak about the incident for many years. [2] What Andrew needs to understand is that the vast majority of abuse victims NEVER come forward. The number one reason for this is the shame they feel as a result of their experience. Only one in seven female adults who were victims of sexual abuse report the abuse. It is even lower for men. Only one in ten children report sexual abuse while they are children. The recent Royal Commission found that it took on average 23 years to report child sexual abuse, and longer again for men who take an average of 27 years.

What about the victims?

I’ve closely followed the Royal Commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse and, like most people, I’ve been horrified by what I’ve heard. In past decades we were just unaware of the extent of the harm (sexual or otherwise) perpetrated in our schools, churches, orphanages and other institutions. I am so glad these things have now been brought into the light, and many of the abusers have been found guilty and justly punished.

My heart goes out to those who have suffered abuse at the hands of those who should have been their protectors. I cannot imagine the fear faced by young children knowing they were powerless to stay safe from adults who abused them or from others who would just not listen to their cries for help.

It’s alright to be angry

I understand the anger felt by the victims and their families. I am angry too, and so is God. The Bible continually calls upon those who follow Jesus to defend the widows and orphans, the children and the marginalised. Those who say they follow Jesus and yet use their power to abuse the powerless will ultimately suffer severe judgement. The prophet Isaiah wrote, “Woe to those who enact evil statutes and to those who constantly record unjust decisions, so as to deprive the needy of justice and rob the poor of My people of their rights, so that widows may be their spoil and that they may plunder the orphans. Now, what will you do in the day of punishment, and in the devastation which will come from afar? To whom will you flee for help?” [3]

Jesus put it this way, “But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” [4]

If you’re angry with God or the church or both, I encourage you to express it in healthy ways. God is not put off by your resentment; in fact, some of the Bible’s authors strongly verbalise their anger and questions to God ~ why have you allowed this to happen to me? Where were you when I was suffering? How long are you going to wait until you help me? Why are you permitting others to hurt me? Read the Psalms, and you’ll find many of these questions and accusations from the writers, and God seems quite comfortable with people expressing themselves to him in this way. I urge you to process your feelings with God and grow closer to him as a result.

Other Considerations

Another thing that’s worth considering is that the presence of a counterfeit means that the genuine article must also exist. No one would make a counterfeit $7 note because there’s no such thing. The presence of phony and abusive priests and ministers, as tragic as that is, also points to the fact that most men and woman in these positions are not fake, they’re the real deal.

I encourage you to look for a church community that is safe, one that has proper processes and policies in place to protect all people, especially children and the vulnerable. While no church is perfect, it is possible to find a community of believers where you can grow in your faith and contribute to making the world a better place. It’s also in a community that you can find a measure of healing as well as the strength to live beyond what has happened in your past.

And if you have offended by sexually abused children (or adults) I encourage you to come forward, not only to receive justice but also to get help. The abuser has invariably been abused and there is support available.

If you are struggling, please call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or the LightFM Careline on 9583 2273.

 

 

[1] Most victims of abuse do not make themselves known. Some have already dealt with the effects of abuse on their own; others don’t want to drag all the painful memories up again. Some don’t want their identity known or don’t want to go to court. Other victims think they are the only ones who experienced abuse, and it’s not until someone else comes forward that they realise they’re not the only one. That is why we often see others claim to be victims of abuse once one person has told their story. Then there’s the very real effect of Stockholm Syndrome, where the victim develops feelings of trust or affection towards a captor.

[2] https://www.news.com.au/national/andrew-bolt-says-cardinal-george-pell-was-fasely-convicted-of-sexually-abusing-two-boys/news-story/093735c7e28d42350460f05d0aca7b00

[3] Isaiah 10:1-3

[4] Matthew 18:6

 

Maybe you’ve just read the title of this blog and thought, “Surely Jesus doesn’t get exasperated? He’s gentle Jesus meek and mild right?”  Wrong!  In fact, Jesus is never described as “mild” in the Bible while he is defined as “meek.”[i]

The mild Jesus seems to be the invention of hymns, poems, and a rather insipid view of the Christian faith that sees strong emotion as sinful or at least unfitting of God.  And yet, in the Bible God is portrayed as angry against injustice and jealous over his people. God has strong feelings, and so does Jesus (God in human form).

Emotional Jesus

The Gospels frequently describe the emotions of Jesus. At various times He was joyful, exhausted, angry, sorrowful, compassionate, frustrated, empathetic, disgusted and, yes, exasperated.

Mark’s gospel describes a time when “The Pharisees came and began to argue with him, asking for a sign from heaven, to test him. He sighed deeply in his spirit and said, “Why does this generation ask for a sign? Truly I tell you, no sign will be given to it.” Then he left them, got back into the boat and crossed to the other side.”(Mark 8:11-13 NIV) Notice that Jesus, “sighed deeply in his spirit”.  He was experiencing strong emotion, intense exasperation, because of the stubbornness of the Pharisees.

A quick look at the previous chapters shows us why Jesus was so annoyed with these guys asking for a sign. Not long before this Jesus fed 5,000+ predominantly Jewish people on the western side of the Sea of Galilee.  A while later he sailed to the eastern side of this Sea and fed 4000+ gentiles.  Add to that some healings and miracles, and walking on water, and it’s easy to understand his exasperation – there was already so much to see, but they wanted more.

Feeding the More Mentality

Sadly, the “mentality of more” didn’t pass away with the Pharisees.  It’s still alive and well even amongst followers of Jesus today who have bought into a consumer mindset of their faith.

While the poor are being fed, orphans adopted, and healings are happening; pastors and leaders faithfully preach and teach the Scriptures week after week, provide opportunities for service, connection, and worship, encourage, pray, counsel, and inspire with vision, some Christians too easily ‘channel their inner Pharisee’ and ask for more – a bit like Oliver Twist.

The twist here is that, unlike Oliver, Christians in the Western world are already exceptionally well fed, but what they have is never enough.

Our needs aren’t being met in this church anymore.

The sermons are not relevant to me.

The worship is better is that church (whatever that means).

The songs are too modern/old, too loud/quiet, fast/slow.

The list is endless, and I’m sure you get the picture.  Amazing things are happening all around these people but they want more and, like the consumers they are, they will go anywhere to get what they want.

The Heart of the Problem

The fundamental problem here is that these consumer Christians, just like the Pharisees that exasperated Jesus, have put themselves in the centre of the universe. In their minds, even if they don’t express it plainly, the whole world revolves around them, their needs and their wants.

And so, life is a constant disappointment because the rest of the world doesn’t recognise the position they perceive for themselves. They are restless souls always looking to get their own way, and for everything to be made-to-order just the way they like it.

No church can be that for every person all the time. Bayside Church doesn’t always tick every box for me, even though I’m its senior leader.  My leadership of Bayside isn’t about getting my way or styling a church that I always enjoy. I’ve made a choice to do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. But instead, in humility I try and value others above myself, not looking to my own interests but to the interests of the others (Phil 2:3-4).

I continuously seek to take myself off the throne of my life and make sure Jesus is firmly in his rightful place. Sometimes I succeed at this. I encourage you to do the same. You’ll be surprised at how much your church (or workplace, or family) improves when you do, and you’ll stop exasperating the people around you (most of the time).

 

[i] Meekness is having power under control. Jesus was all-powerful but also self-controlled. Meekness should never be confused with weakness.

During the early months of Jesus’ ministry, he was seen as a teacher (Rabbi) who travelled around the Galilean countryside teaching in their synagogues. People loved Jesus right from the start. His message was fresh and insightful and often came with a demonstration of the power of God in signs, wonders, and miracles.

On one particular occasion, Jesus returned to Nazareth, the small rural town of about 400 people where he had been brought up. “On the Sabbath day, he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. He stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written: ‘The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour.’ Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing” (Luke 4:14-21).

The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on Jesus for a couple of reasons. Firstly, he was teaching them from the Scriptures, so they were focused on him and secondly, Jesus had stopped reading halfway through a sentence, and they probably wondered why.

Focus on the Good

We don’t know what Jesus taught the people that day. For whatever reason Luke didn’t deem it essential to record the sermon, just the text, and to let us know that Jesus had told the people that this 700-year-old portion of the Hebrew Bible was fulfilled in their hearing on that day!  Wow!

The fact that Jesus stopped reading the Isaiah prophecy halfway through a sentence was very profound. Those in the congregation who knew their scriptures well would have realised that Jesus didn’t complete Isaiah’s sentence: “to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favour and the day of vengeance of our God.” There’s no comma or full stop after the word “favour”.  Jesus just stopped reading, rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down.

Jesus came to declare the beginning of a period known as “the year of the Lord’s favour.” It’s worth noting that favour is spoken of as a Year whereas vengeance is a Day. These are symbolic rather than real periods, but it’s encouraging that favour lasts a long time whereas vengeance or judgement passes quickly. Jesus didn’t come to bring judgement – he warns of it as a future event, but his emphasis is on the favour, which is the good news, the gospel.

To realise more deeply what Jesus is referring to, it’s helpful to have some understanding of the Hebrew calendar. The Torah mandated a seven-year agricultural cycle for the land of Israel, something which is still observed in contemporary Judaism (Lev 25:10). Every seventh year was to be a Sabbatical year in which the land was rested. No ploughing, sowing or harvesting was to be undertaken. The fields would rest and then be ready to produce crops from the next year, and the cycle would begin again. Then every fiftieth year was to be a Year of Jubilee (or year of the Lord’s favour). It was a sacred time of freedom and celebration when everyone received back their original property, non-commercial debts were cancelled, and slaves would return home to their families. Clearly, this was very GOOD NEWS for many people.

A Modern Jubilee

In modern terms, the closest thing we have to a jubilee is an amnesty. In 1996 the Howard government responded to the Port Arthur massacre by allowing owners of illegal firearms to hand in weapons without penalty. “All up, more than 700,000 guns were removed from the community and destroyed. No other nation had ever attempted anything on this scale” (The Age). More than 50,000 guns were collected at the second amnesty in 2017. Usually possessing an illegal firearm would incur a penalty, but not during an amnesty. That’s what Jesus declared by his statement about the year of the Lord’s favour – a time when we can literally hand over all our sins, and mistakes (that would usually incur a punishment) with no questions asked and no penalty to pay. That’s the time we’re in right now – living in God’s favour; our debts have been cancelled, our sins are forgiven, and past offences are forgotten or overlooked.

The year of God’s favour is a whole new age in which God lifts his people out of their distress. If you are a follower of Jesus, you are continually living in his favour. While I was meditating on this a few days ago, the Holy Spirit impressed upon me that Bayside Church is coming into a Year of Favour – not 365 days but rather a new beginning, a fresh start. Christie and I are so excited about this. We’ve shared it with the church board and staff, and now I share it with you too. May I encourage you to draw close to your church at this time and benefit from all the Lord is doing.

Just before Christmas, I uploaded a short clip from a recent sermon on my Facebook page. I included the caption, “A church that makes the main thing the main thing, respects questions and doubts, and seeks unity in Jesus alone ~ Bayside Church!”  The clip went for about 5 minutes and included some humour because I believe making people laugh is like sugar that helps the medicine go down.  But apparently, I’m wrong!

One person commented, “You added a lot of humour here but I never heard Jesus, or the apostles do that in their ministry.”  Personally, I’ve never heard Jesus or the apostles say anything.  I’m not that old (whoops, sorry, humour).  I guess what they meant is they haven’t read anything humorous in Jesus’ or the apostles’ teaching.

Lost in translation

One of the challenges we have with the Bible is that it was written over 2,000 years ago in various languages and to different cultures, and so the humour that is in the Bible doesn’t usually translate into modern English. It’s like when I preach in other countries through an interpreter; some jokes just don’t translate, and other things that I don’t think are funny become absolutely hilarious. Much of my life is like this!

Sad or joyful Jesus?

Quaker author Elton Trueblood in his book The Humour of Christ points out that because of the need to explain the suffering of Jesus, the sad parts can overwhelm the lighter elements. But Jesus was only the Man of Sorrows concerning His work on the cross – and even that He endured with joy (Hebrews 12:2).  In fact, Jesus taught his followers that their sadness would only be for a short period and that his ultimate goal was for their joy to be full (John 16:19-24).

Some may want to point out that the Bible records that “Jesus wept’ not that “Jesus laughed”.  This is mentioned because it was news, that is, an unusual event.  Our newspapers don’t tell us the sun rose this morning, they don’t report on all the people who made it to work safely.  The news announces unusual events – otherwise, it’s not news.  The Bible doesn’t document that Jesus laughed because it wasn’t news, and there’s plenty in the Bible to indicate that Jesus was a happy man.

Hebrews 1:9 tells us “God has set you [Jesus] above your companions by anointing you with the oil of joy.”  He was a joyous man because He was filled with the Spirit and thus had the fruit of the Spirit including joy (Luke 10:21).   Jesus attracted people. Children especially loved Jesus.  They would climb up into his arms, and he would bless them.  No one is attracted to sour-faced individuals.  Jesus told people to “Be of good cheer” (Mt 9:2) – surely, He practised what He preached!

Jesus gave His joy to others – you have to have it to give it (John 15:11).  And yes, Jesus used humour in His teachings.  Statements like “take out the beam from your eye”; “strain out a mosquito and swallow a camel”; and “a camel going through the eye of a needle” would all have been hilarious to Jesus’ hearers.

Misunderstood Jesus

The overly severe Pharisees accused Jesus and his disciples of being gluttons and drunkards.  Of course, they were neither, but in the eyes of the stern religious people of the day, they were guilty because they associated with people who were. The first miracle Jesus did was turning water into the best wine at a seven-day wedding feast.  Unfortunately, some of the Christian faith over the centuries has been about transforming the wine back into water!

On one occasion, Matthew threw him a massive feast and invited all of his tax-collector buddies to meet Jesus (Luke 5:27-39). The happy party caused the religious leaders to criticise, complain and talk of fasting and prayer (obviously because that is more spiritual than eating with friends).  Jesus responded with humour, sarcasm, a parable, and then a sigh that despite his presentation of truth they, like fools, would stick to their old ways.

Even the morose and peevish John Calvin (known for burning opponents at the stake) had to admit in his Institutes of the Christian Religion (III: 19:9): “We are nowhere forbidden to laugh, or to be satisfied with food, … or to be delighted with music, or to drink wine.”  Thanks for your permission, John!

A place for humour in faith

Humour celebrates the goodness of God, the world God created, and the life God gives. It is an accepted fact of medicine that humour is good for our physical health (Proverbs 17:22) and is usually the best way of coping with the trials and disasters that come our way.  If we aren’t careful, we can let circumstances suck the joy right out of us. Humour can lighten the load.

The New Jerusalem Bible translates Colossians 4:6: “Talk to them agreeably and with a flavour of wit (“seasoned with salt,” RSV), and try to fit your answers to the needs of each one.”  Greek comic writers used the verb artyo, meaning “to season”, as seasoning with the salt of wit. That’s what I was doing by using humour in the video I posted to Facebook, seasoning God’s truth with the salt of wit.

Jesus wouldn’t use humour? I beg to differ!

The church didn’t celebrate the birth of Christ until the third century because no one knew (or could agree on) the date. It was highly unlikely for shepherds to be watching their flocks in the middle of a Northern Hemisphere winter. They were more likely to be doing that in Spring (or at least in warmer months).  Still, the actual date of Jesus’ birth remains a mystery. For the first few centuries, the main celebration of the Christian church was Easter.

Historical Influences

In the fourth century, church officials decided to institute the birthof Jesus as a holiday.  It was Pope Julius I who chose December 25 in an effort to engage with the culture of the day (December 25 was the birthday of Mithra, the god of the unconquerable sun. It was believed that Mithra, an infant god, was born of a rock. For some Romans, Mithra’s birthday was the most sacred day of the year).  It was also the time of the Saturnalia festival – a holiday in honour of Saturn, the god of agriculture. According to history.com Saturnalia began in the week leading up to the winter solstice and continued for a full month.  It was a hedonistic time when food and drink were plentiful – much like Christmas for many people today!

In Scandinavia, the Norse celebrated Yule from December 21, the winter solstice, through January, in recognition of the return of the sun. In Germany, people honoured the pagan god Oden during the mid-winter holiday.

Christmas was first called the Feast of the Nativity.  The custom spread to Egypt by 432 and to England by the end of the sixth century. By the end of the eighth century, the celebration of Christmas had spread all the way to Scandinavia. Today, in the Greek and Russian Orthodox churches, Christmas is celebrated 13 days after the 25th, which is also referred to as the Epiphany or Three Kings Day.  This is the day it is believed that the three wise men finally found Jesus in the manger – if only they had a GPS!

By holding Christmas at the same time as traditional winter solstice festivals, church leaders increased the chances that Christmas would be popularly embraced, but gave up the ability to dictate how it was celebrated. By the Middle Ages Christianity had, for the most part, replaced pagan religion. On Christmas, believers attended church and then celebrated raucously in a drunken, carnival-like atmosphere.

Puritan Influences

In the early 17th century, a wave of religious reform changed the way Christmas was celebrated in Europe. When Oliver Cromwell and his Puritan forces took over England in 1645, they vowed to rid England of decadence and, as part of their effort, cancelled Christmas.  In June 1647, a British Parliamentary ordinance abolished the feasts of Christmas, Easter and Whitsun. During the Christmas of 1647, a number of ministers were taken into custody by the authorities for attempting to preach on Christmas Day. But good sense finally won out over religious fundamentalism and King Charles II restored Christmas in 1660.

Current Influences

Two books have heavily influenced our current Christmas celebrations: Washington Irving’s The Sketchbook of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent (1891) – a series of stories about the celebration of Christmas in an English manor house.  Irving focused on Christmas being a peaceful, warm-hearted, family-centered holiday bringing groups together across lines of wealth or social status.

Also around this time, English author Charles Dickens published his classic book, A Christmas Carol. The story’s message was the importance of charity and good will towards all humankind and struck a powerful chord in the United States and England showing members of Victorian society the benefits of celebrating the holiday.

Over the past few decades, some old traditions were added to the “new” view of Christmas presented by Irving and Dickens – people started decorating trees, sending holiday cards and giving gifts.

And that’s how we find Christmas today. In Australia, we have the idea that we celebrate Christmas as it has been done for centuries but that’s not right.  Thanks to two books we’ve really re-invented a holiday to fill a cultural need of a growing nation – and it’s a wonderful time for Christians to engage with culture. 

Hospitality, generosity, sharing food together, spending time with family and friends and helping those less fortunate are all amazing ways to live out our faith in Jesus.  And even though Jesus was probably not born on December 25th the important thing is He was born – God came to earth as a flesh and blood person to show us what He is really like – and that’s worth celebrating!

Photograph Credit:  Mithra, taken by Carole Raddato from FRANKFURT, Germany.

It’s a Christmas classic.  Baby, It’s Cold Outside was written 74 years ago, back in a day when the “Party Piece” was a highly respected form of entertainment (you know, before we all sat around tables each checking out our social media likes).

In 1944, Frank Loesser wrote, Baby, It’s Cold Outside for his wife, Lynn Garland, and himself to sing at a housewarming party in New York City.[i]  It became an instant hit that has, since that time, been featured in movies and recorded by many famous artists.  The song is always sung as a duet, usually with a man and a woman, and sometimes with the woman in the “lead” role.[ii] The lead person is trying to convince their date to stay rather than go home and, what follows, is a tongue-in-cheek exchange of reasons to stay and reasons not to.

Song Gets Cold Shoulder

But over the past few years, and more recently in light of the #MeToo movement, there have been increasing concerns about the song.  There are some lyrics that, when sung by a woman, raise concerns.  For example, “Say what’s in this drink?” And, “I ought to say no, no, no sir.”

Now don’t get me wrong, I am in no way trivialising the #MeToo movement, or what countless women have been subjected to at the hands of men, especially those in powerful roles.  I am also very aware that, as a white man, I have not had to deal with a lot of the things that others (women, people of non-white races, LGBTIQ people, etc) have been subjected to.  If someone is offended by “Baby, It’s Cold Outside” then they’re better not to listen to it.  But should it be banned as it has happened at some radio stations in the USA and Canada?

One such radio station, Star 102 Cleveland, even asked their audience, “Should we play ‘Baby, It’s Cold Outside’ during the holiday season?”  94% said, “Yes, it’s a classic.”  The station banned the song anyway.

Meaning & Context

So, what is this song really all about?  When you read the lyrics, the intent of the song becomes plain.[iii]  It’s a game.  They’re teasing and having fun, that’s the point of the song.  When she (or he) says, “What’s in this drink?” She’s using a phrase that was “pretty common to movies of the era, and was primarily used by characters looking to excuse their own behaviour.”[iv] There’s no inference here that a man is drugging a woman to rape her.  In fact, the woman actually wants to stay but is concerned about what others (her parents, the neighbours, her brother, sister or maiden aunt) would say about her if she did.  This much more accurately reflects the attitudes of the 1940s and the intent of the song.

If radio stations want to look for some songs to ban, how about banning The Rolling Stones’ Brown Sugar song for example?  The song is about a slave trader who enjoys raping African slaves.  And just a cursory look at the current charts is enough to curl your hair.  Almost half of the Australian Top 50 songs are marked, “explicit.”  In the USA three-quarters of the songs in the Top 50 are explicit.  These songs are full of sexual exploits and overtones, drug use and abuse, demeaning language towards women who are often portrayed as sexual conquests, and the foulest language.  Many of the current songs make Baby, It’s Cold Outside look tame and harmless by comparison.  So, why don’t we hear more protests about contemporary songs?  Why pick on a song written almost three-quarters of a century ago?

Sensitive or Desensitised?

Glenn Anderson, a host at the Star 102 station, blogged that although the song was written in a different era, the lyrics felt “manipulative and wrong”.  “The world we live in is extra sensitive now, and people get easily offended, but in a world where #MeToo has finally given women the voice they deserve, the song has no place.”

The world we live in is extra sensitive now?  Really? Are you sure we’re not becoming desensitised?

 

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby,_It%27s_Cold_Outside

[ii] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtoW4aV-CIc

[iii]https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=baby+it%27s+cold+outside+lyrics&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[iv] https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/is-baby-its-cold-outside-an-ode-to-rape-that-deserves-its-sudden-banishment-from-canadian-radio